Is "to disappear someone" now acceptable English?
Is "to disappear someone" now acceptable English?
"To disappear" is never used transitively in my dialect, and this is the first that I've ever heard of it being so used. I'd hazard that "to disappear someone" would not sound natural to most speakers of American or British English.
Some examples:
"People say this doesn't happen in this country," McGeady said, "but one of my neighbors has been disappeared. It's not what he might have done that matters to me -- they disappeared him. They need to question him and let him go, or charge him. It's like Alice in Wonderland meets Franz Kafka."
http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/001196.php
"But Jackson spread his arms. And he gathered Dick in a bear hug that disappeared him. All they could see was the reddish top of Gephardt's head.
http://wereport.blogspot.com/2004_01_18_wereport_archive.html
Ghandi's career was possible because it was the British Empire and not the Soviets, or Nazi's, that claimed India as the jewel in their "crowns". Surely the Russians or Germans would have assassinated or disappeared him into the Gulag decades before he rose to international prominence.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=crooks&comment=7294
"People say this doesn't happen in this country," McGeady said, "but one of my neighbors has been disappeared. It's not what he might have done that matters to me -- they disappeared him. They need to question him and let him go, or charge him. It's like Alice in Wonderland meets Franz Kafka."
http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/001196.php
"But Jackson spread his arms. And he gathered Dick in a bear hug that disappeared him. All they could see was the reddish top of Gephardt's head.
http://wereport.blogspot.com/2004_01_18_wereport_archive.html
Ghandi's career was possible because it was the British Empire and not the Soviets, or Nazi's, that claimed India as the jewel in their "crowns". Surely the Russians or Germans would have assassinated or disappeared him into the Gulag decades before he rose to international prominence.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=crooks&comment=7294
"To disappear someone" is quite widely used to refer to forced disappearances of people.
It is an unnatural construction though and only seems to be used for lack of a more natural alternative, or because a natural alternative would be long-winded.
It is an unnatural construction though and only seems to be used for lack of a more natural alternative, or because a natural alternative would be long-winded.
It's used to avoid saying that a person was murdered by a certain government. It's a mock euphemism and ironic.
> It's used to avoid saying that a person was murdered by a certain government. It's a mock euphemism and ironic.
It doesn't only mean murdered, it can mean imprisoned or internally exiled. It simply means the person was taken away in sinister circumstances, and it is not known what happened to him/her. The saying avoids having to explain the possibilities. We assume something unpleasant has happened, but do not know what.
It doesn't only mean murdered, it can mean imprisoned or internally exiled. It simply means the person was taken away in sinister circumstances, and it is not known what happened to him/her. The saying avoids having to explain the possibilities. We assume something unpleasant has happened, but do not know what.
To me, the transitive usage "to disappear someone" does not come off as unnatural, and has a meaning like that which Ed has laid out above.
Disappear is an intransitive verb.
Is this kind of usage which is against the grammar common in English??
Is this kind of usage which is against the grammar common in English??
Ive used it in the past. It's quite a nice turn of phrase. It adds a darker, sinister edge.
>>I personally would say "to make someone disappear."<<
To me, such does not have quite the particular connotations and like which "to disappear someone" has.
>>Disappear is an intransitive verb.
Is this kind of usage which is against the grammar common in English??<<
In the classical literary language, yes, "to disappear" is only an intransitive verb. Of course, though, much present usage does not necessarily fit the limits of more classical usage.
>>Ive used it in the past. It's quite a nice turn of phrase. It adds a darker, sinister edge.<<
Agreed most definitely.
To me, such does not have quite the particular connotations and like which "to disappear someone" has.
>>Disappear is an intransitive verb.
Is this kind of usage which is against the grammar common in English??<<
In the classical literary language, yes, "to disappear" is only an intransitive verb. Of course, though, much present usage does not necessarily fit the limits of more classical usage.
>>Ive used it in the past. It's quite a nice turn of phrase. It adds a darker, sinister edge.<<
Agreed most definitely.
I've never heard of transitive "disappear" so it sounds odd to my ears. I wouldn't use it but that's interesting some people somewhere do.
It is ungrammatical slang, and jocular (poetic licence), but will no doubt soon become common and considered acceptable, as has, for example a construction often heard in the UK in recent years: "I've been sat here for hours", meaning "I've been sitting here for hours".
"It is ungrammatical slang"
It's not nowadays if it's considered a normal transitive verb by Webster:
http://www.webster.com/dictionary/disappear
It's not nowadays if it's considered a normal transitive verb by Webster:
http://www.webster.com/dictionary/disappear